The Supreme Court’s Order in Mahmudabad’s Case https://indconlawphil.wordpress.com/2025/05/21/how-to-read-a-sentence-the-supreme-courts-order-in-mahmudabads-case/ Gautam Bhatia One might expect that such a far-reaching order – that effaces two Article 19 rights (freedom of expression and freedom of movement) – would be supported by equally strong reasoning...The Court says that it is setting up this SIT “to holistically understand the complexity of the phraseology employed and for proper appreciation of some of the expressions used in these two online posts.” ...
Does the Constitution proscribe “unpatriotic” speech? Let us look at the constitutional text: specifically, Article 19(2). It immediately becomes clear that the Constitution does not proscribe unpatriotic speech, no matter what our personal views on the subject...
...I must therefore respectfully suggest that the Supreme Court’s order may not be entirely correct in law. The reasons for the constitution of the SIT are puzzling. The gag order is outside the Court’s jurisdiction. The confiscation of the passport appears excessive. In the meantime, it is reported that Mahmudabad’s laptop has been confiscated, and one therefore hopes that the Court’s order does not become an excuse for a roving and fishing enquiry by the police, going beyond the remit of the FIR.